• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
The effect of public health measures on the 1918 influenza pandemic in U.S. cities.公共卫生措施对美国城市1918年流感大流行的影响。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007 May 1;104(18):7588-93. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0611071104. Epub 2007 Apr 6.
2
The Spanish influenza of 1918 in St. Louis, Missouri.1918年在密苏里州圣路易斯爆发的西班牙流感。
Public Health Nurs. 2006 Sep-Oct;23(5):479-83. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1446.2006.00586.x.
3
Nonpharmaceutical interventions implemented by US cities during the 1918-1919 influenza pandemic.美国各城市在1918 - 1919年流感大流行期间实施的非药物干预措施。
JAMA. 2007 Aug 8;298(6):644-54. doi: 10.1001/jama.298.6.644.
4
Transmissibility and mortality impact of epidemic and pandemic influenza, with emphasis on the unusually deadly 1951 epidemic.流行性和大流行性流感的传播性及死亡率影响,重点关注异常致命的1951年流感疫情。
Vaccine. 2006 Nov 10;24(44-46):6701-7. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2006.05.067. Epub 2006 Jun 9.
5
Transmission dynamics of the great influenza pandemic of 1918 in Geneva, Switzerland: Assessing the effects of hypothetical interventions.1918年瑞士日内瓦大流感疫情的传播动态:评估假设干预措施的效果。
J Theor Biol. 2006 Jul 21;241(2):193-204. doi: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2005.11.026. Epub 2006 Jan 4.
6
Qualitative analysis of the level of cross-protection between epidemic waves of the 1918-1919 influenza pandemic.1918-1919 年流感大流行疫情波之间交叉保护水平的定性分析。
J Theor Biol. 2009 Dec 21;261(4):584-92. doi: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2009.08.020. Epub 2009 Aug 22.
7
Public health interventions and epidemic intensity during the 1918 influenza pandemic.1918年流感大流行期间的公共卫生干预措施与疫情强度
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007 May 1;104(18):7582-7. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0610941104. Epub 2007 Apr 6.
8
Observations on mortality during the 1918 influenza pandemic.关于1918年流感大流行期间死亡率的观察
Clin Infect Dis. 2001 Oct 15;33(8):1375-8. doi: 10.1086/322662. Epub 2001 Sep 17.
9
[Influenza and death. High mortality not only due to the great epidemics].[流感与死亡。高死亡率不仅归因于大规模流行]
Lakartidningen. 1991 Mar 6;88(10):854-9.
10
Model predictions and evaluation of possible control strategies for the 2009 A/H1N1v influenza pandemic in Italy.模型预测和评估意大利 2009 年 A/H1N1v 流感大流行的可能控制策略。
Epidemiol Infect. 2011 Jan;139(1):68-79. doi: 10.1017/S0950268810001317. Epub 2010 Jun 14.

引用本文的文献

1
Discussing the epidemiology of COVID-19 model with the effective numerical scheme.用有效数值格式讨论新冠病毒疾病(COVID-19)模型的流行病学。
Sci Rep. 2025 Jul 17;15(1):25925. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-97785-8.
2
"Early, rapid, aggressive": when strategic interactions between governments, opposition, and lobbies can hinder effective responses to epidemics.“早期、快速、积极”:政府、反对派和游说团体之间的战略互动何时会阻碍对流行病的有效应对。
Front Epidemiol. 2025 Jun 18;5:1593883. doi: 10.3389/fepid.2025.1593883. eCollection 2025.
3
What Lessons can Be Learned From the Management of the COVID-19 Pandemic?从新冠疫情管理中可以吸取哪些教训?
Int J Public Health. 2025 May 30;70:1607727. doi: 10.3389/ijph.2025.1607727. eCollection 2025.
4
Assessing the effectiveness of test-trace-isolate interventions using a multi-layered temporal network.使用多层时间网络评估检测-追踪-隔离干预措施的有效性。
Infect Dis Model. 2025 Mar 14;10(3):775-786. doi: 10.1016/j.idm.2025.03.005. eCollection 2025 Sep.
5
Revisiting Pearl's influenza studies by bootstrapping for forward variable selection with a null factor.通过自举法进行具有零因子的前向变量选择来重新审视珀尔的流感研究。
PLoS One. 2025 Feb 25;20(2):e0318685. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0318685. eCollection 2025.
6
Optimizing Missouri's Preparation for the Next Pandemic: Lessons Learned from COVID-19: Part 1.优化密苏里州对下一次大流行的准备:从新冠疫情中吸取的教训:第一部分。
Mo Med. 2024 Nov-Dec;121(6):424-432.
7
The 1978 English boarding school influenza outbreak: where the classic SEIR model fails.1978 年英国寄宿学校流感爆发:经典 SEIR 模型的失败之处。
J R Soc Interface. 2024 Nov;21(220):20240394. doi: 10.1098/rsif.2024.0394. Epub 2024 Nov 20.
8
Estimating population infection rates from non-random testing data: Evidence from the COVID-19 pandemic.从非随机检测数据估计人群感染率:来自 COVID-19 大流行的证据。
PLoS One. 2024 Sep 26;19(9):e0311001. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0311001. eCollection 2024.
9
Invasive Group A Streptococcal Infections in Europe After the COVID-19 Pandemic.新冠疫情后欧洲的侵袭性A组链球菌感染
Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2024 Oct 4;121(20):673-680. doi: 10.3238/arztebl.m2024.0127.
10
Non-pharmaceutical interventions in containing COVID-19 pandemic after the roll-out of coronavirus vaccines: a systematic review.疫苗推出后控制 COVID-19 大流行的非药物干预措施:系统评价。
BMC Public Health. 2024 Jun 6;24(1):1524. doi: 10.1186/s12889-024-18980-2.

本文引用的文献

1
Nonpharmaceutical influenza mitigation strategies, US communities, 1918-1920 pandemic.1918 - 1920年大流行期间美国社区的非药物性流感缓解策略
Emerg Infect Dis. 2006 Dec;12(12):1961-4. doi: 10.3201/eid1212.060506.
2
Strategies for mitigating an influenza pandemic.缓解流感大流行的策略。
Nature. 2006 Jul 27;442(7101):448-52. doi: 10.1038/nature04795. Epub 2006 Apr 26.
3
Non-pharmaceutical interventions for pandemic influenza, national and community measures.大流行性流感的非药物干预措施、国家及社区措施。
Emerg Infect Dis. 2006 Jan;12(1):88-94. doi: 10.3201/eid1201.051371.
4
Respiratory infections during SARS outbreak, Hong Kong, 2003.2003年香港严重急性呼吸系统综合症爆发期间的呼吸道感染
Emerg Infect Dis. 2005 Nov;11(11):1738-41. doi: 10.3201/eid1111.050729.
5
Strategies for containing an emerging influenza pandemic in Southeast Asia.东南亚遏制新型流感大流行的策略。
Nature. 2005 Sep 8;437(7056):209-14. doi: 10.1038/nature04017. Epub 2005 Aug 3.
6
Epidemiological evidence of an early wave of the 1918 influenza pandemic in New York City.纽约市1918年流感大流行早期浪潮的流行病学证据。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 Aug 2;102(31):11059-63. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0408290102. Epub 2005 Jul 26.
7
Transmissibility of 1918 pandemic influenza.1918年大流行性流感的传播性。
Nature. 2004 Dec 16;432(7019):904-6. doi: 10.1038/nature03063.
8
Updating the accounts: global mortality of the 1918-1920 "Spanish" influenza pandemic.更新数据:1918 - 1920年“西班牙”流感大流行的全球死亡率
Bull Hist Med. 2002 Spring;76(1):105-15. doi: 10.1353/bhm.2002.0022.
9
Observations on mortality during the 1918 influenza pandemic.关于1918年流感大流行期间死亡率的观察
Clin Infect Dis. 2001 Oct 15;33(8):1375-8. doi: 10.1086/322662. Epub 2001 Sep 17.

公共卫生措施对美国城市1918年流感大流行的影响。

The effect of public health measures on the 1918 influenza pandemic in U.S. cities.

作者信息

Bootsma Martin C J, Ferguson Neil M

机构信息

Mathematical Institute, Faculty of Sciences, Utrecht University, Budapestlaan 6, 3508 TA Utrecht, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007 May 1;104(18):7588-93. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0611071104. Epub 2007 Apr 6.

DOI:10.1073/pnas.0611071104
PMID:17416677
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1849868/
Abstract

During the 1918 influenza pandemic, the U.S., unlike Europe, put considerable effort into public health interventions. There was also more geographic variation in the autumn wave of the pandemic in the U.S. compared with Europe, with some cities seeing only a single large peak in mortality and others seeing double-peaked epidemics. Here we examine whether differences in the public health measures adopted by different cities can explain the variation in epidemic patterns and overall mortality observed. We show that city-specific per-capita excess mortality in 1918 was significantly correlated with 1917 per-capita mortality, indicating some intrinsic variation in overall mortality, perhaps related to sociodemographic factors. In the subset of 23 cities for which we had partial data on the timing of interventions, an even stronger correlation was found between excess mortality and how early in the epidemic interventions were introduced. We then fitted an epidemic model to weekly mortality in 16 cities with nearly complete intervention-timing data and estimated the impact of interventions. The model reproduced the observed epidemic patterns well. In line with theoretical arguments, we found the time-limited interventions used reduced total mortality only moderately (perhaps 10-30%), and that the impact was often very limited because of interventions being introduced too late and lifted too early. San Francisco, St. Louis, Milwaukee, and Kansas City had the most effective interventions, reducing transmission rates by up to 30-50%. Our analysis also suggests that individuals reactively reduced their contact rates in response to high levels of mortality during the pandemic.

摘要

在1918年流感大流行期间,与欧洲不同,美国在公共卫生干预方面投入了大量精力。与欧洲相比,美国大流行秋季波在地理上的差异也更大,一些城市仅出现一个死亡高峰,而其他城市则出现双高峰疫情。在此,我们研究不同城市所采取的公共卫生措施差异是否能够解释所观察到的疫情模式和总体死亡率的变化。我们发现,1918年特定城市的人均超额死亡率与1917年人均死亡率显著相关,这表明总体死亡率存在一些内在差异,可能与社会人口因素有关。在我们掌握干预时间部分数据的23个城市子集中,超额死亡率与干预措施在疫情中引入的早晚之间存在更强的相关性。然后,我们为16个拥有近乎完整干预时间数据的城市的每周死亡率拟合了一个疫情模型,并估计了干预措施的影响。该模型很好地再现了所观察到的疫情模式。与理论观点一致,我们发现所采用的限时干预措施仅适度降低了总死亡率(可能为10%-30%),而且由于干预措施引入过晚且解除过早,其影响往往非常有限。旧金山、圣路易斯、密尔沃基和堪萨斯城的干预措施最为有效,将传播率降低了30%-50%。我们的分析还表明,在大流行期间,个人会因高死亡率而被动降低接触率。